1 2026:CGHC:1695 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 273 of 2026 Devanand Alias Bodu Gaikwad S/o Thukel Gaikwad Aged About 35 Years R/o - B.S.U.P. Colony, Block No. 11, Room No. 21, Khalabada Saddu P.S. Vidhansabha Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer P.S. Vidhansabha Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 400/2025 registered at Police Station – Vidhansabha Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) offence under Sections 109, 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, namely Purushottam Sahu, lodged a First Information Report (F.I.R.) on 10.08.2025 alleging that at around 20:00 hours, while he was purchasing liquor at Aamasivani ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.13 12:04:35 +0530 2 Liquor Shop, Raipur, the co-accused, namely Karan Nayak, along with the present applicant, approached the complainant and asked for the liquor. When the complainant refused to give them the liquor purchased by him, the co-accused Karan Nayak took out a knife and stabbed the complainant, whereafter both of them fled from the spot. Therefore, the aforesaid offences were registered against the co-accused and the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that no aforesaid offences under the Indian Penal Code are made out against the present applicant, as there is not a single piece of evidence placed by the prosecution against him. He also submits that the main accused is Karan Nayak, who caused injuries to the complainant by stabbing him on his stomach and back. The complainant, in his First Information Report (F.I.R.), has specifically stated that Karan Nayak stabbed him and not the present applicant. He further submits that the complainant was discharged from Balai Hospital on the very next day of the incident, i.e., on 11.08.2025, after taking Leave Against Medical Advice (L.A.M.A.), which fact forms part of the charge-sheet. This clearly shows that no grievous injuries were caused to the complainant, and hence, no aforesaid offences are made out against the present applicant. He also submits that the complainant thereafter went to B.R. Ambedkar Hospital on 14.08.2025 and was discharged on 22.08.2025, wherein the medical report indicates that no medical abnormalities were found by the doctors. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 11.08.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of 3 the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in this case. He submits that the co-accused, namely Karan Nayak, assaulted the injured with a knife, causing grievous injuries. So far as the present applicant is concerned, the allegation against him is that he allegedly assaulted the injured with hands and fists. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and from perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the main allegation is against the co-accused, namely Karan Nayak, who assaulted the injured with a knife, resulting in grievous injuries. So far as the present applicant is concerned, his case is distinguishable from that of the co-accused Karan Nayak, as the only allegation against him is that he assaulted the injured with hands and fists, causing simple injuries. Furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and he is in jail since 11.08.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Devanand Alias Bodu Gaikwad involved in Crime No. 400/2025 registered at Police Station – Vidhansabha Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) offence under Sections 109, 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for 4 evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek